Hundred to be axed?

[Paul W]

I didn't know where to put this, as it isn't Middlesex specific news, but on the other forum we always had threads that weren't just about Middlesex.

The hundred might be gone after 2024 season.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-12022119/The-faces-chop-talks-taking-place-turning-competition-T20-event.html

Here's hoping!

[David Uren]

Good point Paul. Perhaps James (Mitchell) could either rename the Sports other than Cricket section to a “Non-Middlesex Cricket and Other Sports” section or set-up an additional section for Non-Middlesex Cricket. (Not taking your efforts for granted, James - you’ve done a lot of work already)

[Alan Malby]

I see there was an article on Friday in the Telegraph by Nick Hoult - perhaps someone can post it here - it referred to "county cricket leaking cash every day". I appreciate this is a mindset that makes everything more straightforward making it easier for everyone to take sides and express opinions, but it is misleadingly simplistic. County cricket is in part a cost centre to all first-class cricket. It's conceivable, I would go as far as likely that without any England cricket, the county game would be viable and profitable. Of course, competitions would have to be well designed, branded and marketed to ensure that they sell to broadcasters for sufficient sums. The huge advantage to the counties would be competitions and rules that were reasonable, fair, maximising meaning and scheduled to make the most of the cricket season in contrast to what has increasingly become farcical (James Tredwell being a Kent and Sussex player at the same time being a highlight - another bringing in an overseas player just for finals day - these occurred years ago, ongoing decline continuing apace!).

Of course, I'm not suggesting there shouldn't be international cricket - only the acceptance of a more accurate and realistic mindset when considering county cricket despite making everything more challenging to analyse and to determine the way forward.

[Andrew]

Please let this be true. I can just about get my head round the existence of T20 but not the Hundred. Couldn’t even tell you what format the IPL is. Is it T20? Haven’t a clue but know it isn’t the Hundred format. If the Hundred is scrapped then perhaps cricket might actually have a future after all!

[Max Sawyer]

http://ipl.india.crictotal.com/ipl-rules.php

https://www.timesofsports.com/cricket/ipl/2023-format-new-rules/

So that's all clear, then!

[Max Sawyer]

ECB has fudged the Hundred – time to back it or bin it
Governing body has two choices, to go global, embracing Indian investment in its franchises or essentially restore counties front and centre

NICK HOULT
CHIEF CRICKET CORRESPONDENT
28 April 2023 • 8:58pm
Nick Hoult
Southern Brave players celebrate with the trophy after winning The Hundred final
Southern Brace lift the inaugural men’s Hundred trophy after beating Birmingham Phoenix at Lord’s in the final CREDIT: Action Images via Reuters/John Sibley
There will be many cricket lovers, particularly among Telegraph readers, who will dance a jig of delight if the new regime running the English game decides to axe the Hundred.

Our recent manifesto for change in English cricket, written by Scyld Berry, caught the eye of English and Wales Cricket Board officials because readers’ love of red ball, first-class cricket was loud and clear.

But the Hundred is here, it is a reality, and will be the only cricket played in England in August as the country, hopefully, basks in the afterglow of an Ashes win.

The discussion about its future post 2025, when the current agreements with the counties expire, will dominate the next two years and frame the success or failure of the Richard Thompson-Richard Gould era in the same way it did for their predecessors, and probably will for their successors too.

Current halfway house status not helping anyone
Put starkly, there are two choices: bin the Hundred or back it because at the moment it is a halfway house and that is not helping anyone.

To back it means selling equity in the eight teams to Indian businessmen; attracting IPL owners desperate to be associated with the bastions of English cricket – The Oval, Lord’s, Edgbaston and so on.

That would raise massive funds for the English game, permit the teams to pay proper salaries to attract the best talent, put on a player auction that would create noise around the tournament and bring in sponsorship and ad revenue from India – the cricket world’s biggest market.

At the moment the top salary in the Hundred is £125,000. Ben Stokes and some of the England all-format players see it as a chance to have a break rather than bolster their bank balance . That might be different if they were to be paid a salary in keeping with the earning power these players command in the modern era.

The Indian influence increases revenue for broadcasters, and brings new ideas, and new money to English cricket. Isolationism drives such investment into the arms of others. Cricket Australia decided to go it alone with the Big Bash so the Mumbai Indians and others looked elsewhere – to South Africa and the UAE – and those teams can now offer more money for Australian players than their own board.

There is a T20 competition starting in the United States clashing with the English summer that offers the IPL teams another avenue to pursue if England is closed off. What happens then? The Hundred will not be able to compete for the top talent. The best players will go elsewhere.

‘Franchises feed off established clubs’
Of course, the franchises feed off established clubs. They do not produce talent, they steal it away. A county like Leicestershire deserves proper remuneration for producing Rehan Ahmed if he goes on to command millions on the franchise circuit. Compensating the counties properly, to keep alive their talent pathways, would have to be part of any equity sale.

Then there is the other road: binning the Hundred. What would that achieve? It would unite the game under one shortest format, Twenty20. It would ensure the existing counties are front and centre again.

But it would probably also mean England premier T20 tournament is a middle of the road, second division competition compared with the IPL. More teams produces more cricket, and full grounds in England (possibly). That suits the English game but without external investment where does the money come from to pay the best players? In that scenario the ECB accepts its place in the world order, and the competition suits a home market and creates little to no stir elsewhere.

It appears unlikely that Sky would have the same appetite for an 18-team tournament with promotion and relegation. Franchise owners do not like jeopardy. They are not going to pay for a team if there is a chance it could be relegated and drop out of a premier league. The counties balked at the idea when it was floated before because they feared losing lucrative local derbies if teams were in different divisions.

Salaries would remain at their current level, and the ECB would risk souring its relationship with Sky. Wherever you stand on the free to air debate, Sky has bankrolled English cricket for two decades and backed the ECB’s Hundred dream. Taking them for granted could be dangerous.

But what do we have at the moment? A hundred that the new regime at the ECB does not really believe in, regardless of what is said publicly. Salaries are small fry but crowds decent, full of families and there has already been a £400 million offer from Bridgepoint to buy a majority stake in the tournament. The women’s Hundred is thriving and a valuable source of future income. A mish-mash of a women’s Hundred and T20 for the men would be deeply unsatisfactory and send the wrong message about the women’s game.

There is much to discuss and the way the counties handled the Strauss reforms – basically by doing nothing other than say no – does not inspire confidence that any decisions will be made beyond what suits each club. It is down to Thompson and Gould to provide the vision.

The Hundred has lost money so far, but so do all start up leagues. County cricket leaks cash every day and is propped up by broadcast deals based on the England team and bilateral cricket which is under threat. You do not have to look far to find a county in financial trouble.

So bin it or back the Hundred. Time to decide is close.

[Andrew]

http://ipl.india.crictotal.com/ipl-rules.php

https://www.timesofsports.com/cricket/ipl/2023-format-new-rules/

So that's all clear, then!

Thanks, Max. That explains it all as I have to admit to being totally naive about it.

[Robin Knight]

I see there was an article on Friday in the Telegraph by Nick Hoult - perhaps someone can post it here - it referred to "county cricket leaking cash every day". I appreciate this is a mindset that makes everything more straightforward making it easier for everyone to take sides and express opinions, but it is misleadingly simplistic. County cricket is in part a cost centre to all first-class cricket. It's conceivable, I would go as far as likely that without any England cricket, the county game would be viable and profitable. Of course, competitions would have to be well designed, branded and marketed to ensure that they sell to broadcasters for sufficient sums. The huge advantage to the counties would be competitions and rules that were reasonable, fair, maximising meaning and scheduled to make the most of the cricket season in contrast to what has increasingly become farcical (James Tredwell being a Kent and Sussex player at the same time being a highlight - another bringing in an overseas player just for finals day - these occurred years ago, ongoing decline continuing apace!).

Of course, I'm not suggesting there shouldn't be international cricket - only the acceptance of a more accurate and realistic mindset when considering county cricket despite making everything more challenging to analyse and to determine the way forward.

Alan - why is the obvious answer to all this always ignored? It is that 1st class red ball cricket be played only by the counties (+50 over games). The Hundred would be abolished (a stupid gimmick) and T-20 cricket would become city-based - London (two teams N & S of the river), Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Nottingham, Birmingham, Glasgow/Edinburgh, Cardiff, Newcastle, Southampton, Bristol, Canterbury, Brighton, Plymouth. 16 teams. The franchises would be put up for auction by the ECB for 5 years but have to be renewed after that. Players from worldwide would be auctioned to play annually, but each team would have to include 50% of English-qualified players. Usual T-20 rules to apply, not the silly Hundred rules.

If the counties objected (they might well), they should be allowed run their own T-20 competition alongside the franchised one as happens, I think, in other countries. Clearly, their best players would gravitate to the franchise game. But so what? It would give a chance to both younger and older players. Might even tempt one or two out of early retirement.

As for the playing schedule, Test and 1st class cricket in England should take place in May, June, first half of July and Sept with T-20 competitions limited to six weeks in second half of July and all August.

[Max Sawyer]

I hope you understood it all better than I did, Andrew!

[Alan Malby]

Alan - why is the obvious answer to all this always ignored? It is that 1st class red ball cricket be played only by the counties (+50 over games). The Hundred would be abolished (a stupid gimmick) and T-20 cricket would become city-based - London (two teams N & S of the river), Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Nottingham, Birmingham, Glasgow/Edinburgh, Cardiff, Newcastle, Southampton, Bristol, Canterbury, Brighton, Plymouth. 16 teams. The franchises would be put up for auction by the ECB for 5 years but have to be renewed after that. Players from worldwide would be auctioned to play annually, but each team would have to include 50% of English-qualified players. Usual T-20 rules to apply, not the silly Hundred rules.

If the counties objected (they might well), they should be allowed run their own T-20 competition alongside the franchised one as happens, I think, in other countries. Clearly, their best players would gravitate to the franchise game. But so what? It would give a chance to both younger and older players. Might even tempt one or two out of early retirement.

As for the playing schedule, Test and 1st class cricket in England should take place in May, June, first half of July and Sept with T-20 competitions limited to six weeks in second half of July and all August.

That's an interesting idea, definitely the kind of thinking that's required. In terms of county finances, if there was a T20 at Hove every week, especially on a Friday evening, Saturday or Sunday, of the warm Summer months, it does seem the ground would often be full or close to it. I'm not suggesting this should be the case, difficult to schedule alongside other formats whilst keeping everything meaningful - unlike the Hundred that is only entertainment requiring belief - but it does highlight the potential of county cricket.

[Andrew]

I hope you understood it all better than I did, Andrew!


Almost certainly not!

[Stewart Lewis]

I believe there's quite a lot of hard evidence about interest in The Hundred - some of it in this article:

https://www.ft.com/content/9c70a412-c1eb-4a8e-81f0-7616bf499028

I'm not aware of any stats about demand for cricket in schools (if it's an option, of course) or clubs. I suspect that's a longer-term aim.

Robin Knight always contrast fans' 'proper' enthusiasm/commitment to counties with 'manufactured' enthusiasm/commitment to The Hundred and its teams. It grates on you (and to some extent on me) but I'm afraid enthusiasm is enthusiasm - and there's been plenty of it among the new audience drawn to The Hundred.

By the way, I agree with those (including Robin Knight) who find The Hundred's tweaks of format from T20 unnecessary and irritating. For me it should go back to format alignment with other T20 competitions, while retaining its special features (high calibre of players, double-headers of men's and women's matches etc).

[Peter H]

T-20 cricket would become city-based - London (two teams N & S of the river), Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Nottingham, Birmingham, Glasgow/Edinburgh, Cardiff, Newcastle, Southampton, Bristol, Canterbury, Brighton, Plymouth. 16 teams.

While I fully accept your point, Plymouth isn't the best choice of venue in the South West without significant investment in ground and facilities. Neither is Exeter. Taunton would be the better option despite (as eny fule no ;)) being a town. It already has sufficient infrastructure to handle top-flight cricket. This is, to a certain extent, the legacy of county cricket: their grounds aren't always in large cities.

But I'm nit-picking an excellent idea.

[Stewart Lewis]

I believe there's quite a lot of hard evidence about interest in The Hundred - some of it in this article:

https://www.ft.com/content/9c70a412-c1eb-4a8e-81f0-7616bf499028

I'm not aware of any stats about demand for cricket in schools (if it's an option, of course) or clubs. I suspect that's a longer-term aim.

Robin Knight always contrast fans' 'proper' enthusiasm/commitment to counties with 'manufactured' enthusiasm/commitment to The Hundred and its teams. It grates on you (and to some extent on me) but I'm afraid enthusiasm is enthusiasm - and there's been plenty of it among the new audience drawn to The Hundred.

By the way, I agree with those (including Robin Knight) who find The Hundred's tweaks of format from T20 unnecessary and irritating. For me it should go back to format alignment with other T20 competitions, while retaining its special features (high calibre of players, double-headers of men's and women's matches etc).

Please note: the above post of mine has been moved from another thread. That's sensible because it's relevant to this one, but it's been incorrectly edited. It was originally a reply to Alan Malby; the penultimate point should read: "Alan Malby always contrasts...".

[John Fitzgerald]

There is a forensic article by George Dobell about the Hundred finances and losses in this month's Cricketer. I am a print subscriber so have no way of posting a link. It may be possible to pay via in Cricketer web site.

It's not just the Hundred I want gone it is the whole pernicious idea of franchises. I am only interested in my county Middlesex

[Gareth Jones]

Here is the article for those that are interested but can't read it, it was part of a wider report on the business of cricket https://www.ft.com/reports/business-cricket

The Hundred plays a long game with the short format
Samuel Agini
5–7 minutes

The Hundred — the short-format tournament launched last year, charged with revitalising English cricket — is out to prove it is not a one-season wonder.
The England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), which is investing £180mn in the period 2020-2024 in the development and marketing of the competition, aims to build on the early signs of success in 2021.
The ECB says more than 16mn people watched The Hundred on television last summer, generating an estimated surplus in excess of £10mn on revenues of about £50mn in the tournament’s first year.
Nearly 60 per cent of those viewers were watching their first live English cricket of the year, according to the governing body.
Attendance at the matches was high, with 510,000 tickets sold. About a fifth went to children and another fifth were bought by women, which bodes well for the ECB’s aim of broadening participation in the sport.
This year, Sanjay Patel, managing director of The Hundred, believes more can be achieved, Covid-19 permitting. There are plans for more activities for spectators, particularly families.
The stakes are high because the ECB has bet The Hundred can emulate the success of the Indian Premier League. The IPL uses the more established Twenty20 short format and has become a multibillion-dollar business since its first season in 2008
Developing the women’s game is a priority for The Hundred’s organisers. Attendance at matches between women’s teams last year hit 267,000 — almost double the previous record of 136,000 for the women’s T20 World Cup in Australia in 2020.
“It was just crazy,” says Issy Wong, a fast bowler with the Birmingham Phoenix women’s team in The Hundred. “The scale of it was what shocked me.”
Patel thinks this year’s Commonwealth Games in Birmingham, which will feature some of the best women cricketers from overseas in a T20 competition, will potentially benefit The Hundred.
Following the 4-0 defeat for England’s men to Australia in the recent Ashes series of five-day matches, the ECB is facing accusations that The Hundred is damaging Test cricket. The latter is traditionally seen as the highest form of the game.
The Hundred simplifies the sport into two innings — each of up to 65 minutes and 100 balls bowled.
People are turning a blind eye to The Hundred’s beneficial impact on the women’s game, says Wong. She adds that “where I live, you walk down the street and see kids in the Birmingham Phoenix shirt.”
Andrew Umbers, a partner at Oakwell Sports Advisory, a consultancy, argues that the ECB could increase audiences by improving the quality of The Hundred.
He points out that several overseas stars, such as Australian Aaron Finch, had to drop out of the inaugural tournament because of scheduling conflicts and the pandemic.
“The return of these players for the 2022 competition would provide it with an immediate quality increase,” says Umbers.
“For the new and young audiences, it is vital to keep them in touch with cricket throughout the year to ensure they come back for the second season.”
He suggests the broadcast spectacle could be enhanced to further engage fans — for example, by equipping batters with microphones so they can talk viewers through their technique.
But real impetus could come from replicating The Hundred — Umbers calls it a “very transportable competition” — in other countries.
Monty Panesar, the former England international, agrees. “The Hundred is absolutely ideal for the American market,” he says.
“It’s fast, it’s 100 balls, it’s simple for the Americans to understand.”
Patel says he has not held talks about licensing the format elsewhere, pointing out that the ECB’s priority is the domestic game.
Investors may also see opportunities in the English competition. Craig Flindall, general manager of the Birmingham Phoenix franchise, notes that private equity firms have invested in a range of sports, including football, rugby and the IPL. This trend has been accelerated by the pandemic, which has left many teams and leagues in need of capital.
“We all know that if there are growth opportunities in any market, private equity is going to be potentially interested,” Flindall says. “We’re at too early a stage of the competition to be looking at it [now], but it may come further down the line.”
Patel is aware of investor interest in the eight teams that compete in The Hundred but suggests selling stakes or outright ownership in the likes of the Oval Invincibles or Southern Brave — the women’s and men’s winners, respectively — is premature.
He expects continued interest “but that’s a big conversation for the game to have”, he says. “The last thing we want to do is get carried away with one year of success because . . . you need to back that up.”